you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Panic delayed, saves lives. People are already beginning to stock up on extra supplies, and the longer that can continue relatively normally, the better, imo.

[–]magnora7[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Panic delayed, saves lives.

Not if it just causes greater panic later!

I agree stocking up and things going normally is good. I just don't think a large enough percent of people are stocking up on supplies early enough, and that will create more intense shortages later, which will potentially cause deaths.

[–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Even if it causes more panic and death later, although there would be optimal parameters for all factors in this calculation. IMO, an early mass panic that happened before a certain level of preparations began could cripple society to a degree that wouldn't happen 'later', and cause the greatest number of deaths.

For every month that mass panic is delayed, more preparations by supply chains and companies of all types can be made to increasingly mitigate the damage. How much they'll succeed is a question, but their survival in the coming 'economy' will be in the balance too.

It's going to be a historic market tomorrow.

[–]anti_misinformation 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

appropriate panic, delayed, kills.

[–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That too.